sillstaw

Conflicted. On one hand, I'd love to hear if Jason could manage to jerk off to this movie. On the other, it's like when someone brought up "Videodrome:" Yeah, the movie is weird and bizarre, but that's kind of the point. It's not like Cronenberg sincerely made a movie thinking people would find car crashes sexy; he had to have known it was off-putting, which is more than you can say for the makers of, say, "All About Steve." (And if HDTGM ever does an Oscar winner, it has to be "Crash." Or "The Greatest Show on Earth." Either one.)

If they do this (or any Burt Reynolds movie, really), I'd love it if they got Jon Benjamin to be the guest. They could discuss ideas for "Gator 2!"

Nowadays, he does more TV. He works on "The Vampire Diaries" and "The Following," the latter of which I was sorely tempted to recommend to HDTGM solely based off the AV Club's continuing reviews of how implausible and aggravating the show is. (I didn't recommend it, because I decided it probably wouldn't be any fun to talk about a show where people are gruesomely killed every dang week—or, from the 20 minutes of the pilot that I watched, just before every commercial break.)

I don't know if any of the main crew would want to do that much homework for the movie, though. Maybe if they got a comic book geek as the guest...

Initially it was going to be "Killing Mrs. Tingle." Then Columbine happened, and suddenly it wasn't politically correct to talk about murdering your teachers.

Well, I'll admit, I would totally pay to see a movie called "Battleflower." Hear that, Hollywood? $400 million box office, guaranteed.

It's "Bellflower," not "Battleflower."

Ah yes, the movie that dares to have a dream. A dream that a world-famous movie star could brutally murder a bunch of paparazzi and get away with it because they're creepy and also because they're paparazzi. And celebrities probably wonder why regular people think they're overprivileged.

I heard the story a little differently. The way I heard it, he knew his time was limited, so he let his kids choose the role. (The fact that it probably paid very well didn't hurt, either.) Incidentally, of all six or so video game-based movies I've seen in my life, this is probably my favorite*. It's so over-the-top and looney that I can't help but love it as a comedy, which I suspect is partly what the filmmakers intended. * The only decent competitor is "Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within." Go ahead and make fun of my terrible taste.

Not to mention those movies' plotlines seem pretty normal for stoner comedies ("We can't find the restaurant!"). This is a movie about guys smoking special weed that makes them smart enough to get into Harvard. That's next-level crazy.

The great thing about this movie? It was supposed to come out last year, then at the last minute, they held it back. This meant that things ranging from Maxim articles to Halloween costumes were coming out for a movie that wouldn't be released until the next year. They claimed it was to convert it into 3D (because post-converted 3D always works so well), but in truth, they most likely realized that killing off Channing Tatum's character early on was a bad idea post-"Magic Mike" and "21 Jump Street."

That was a pretty big complaint among critics. To me, it's not surprising, since "The King's Speech" had equally bizarre choices in cinematography. Still, it means that "Les Miserables" probably doesn't even have the amusing aspect I've found in old clips from "Cop Rock," where people are breaking out into song and it's clear everybody around them is just sitting or standing around, staring at them.

A few observations: 1. It cost $4,500,000? I'm surprised they didn't fudge or skimp to make it $4,200,000. 2. "From the producer of 'Twilight.'" Because we all know how big stoners were on "Twilight." (Incidentally, I have a theory that a movie is in trouble when they advertise it as "from the producers of" something else, even bigger trouble when it's "from a/the producer of," and is dire when it's "from the studio that brought you...") 3. Lara Flynn Boyle is in this? Now there's someone who appears to have never had the munchies in her life.

One of my favorite jokes the AV Club's Newswire made a while back was that Edgar Wright, Sam Raimi, Ridley Scott and Guillermo del Toro sign up for as many projects as they can so they can sumo-wrestle using the scripts as a bunch of padding.

I assume Vince Offer gets money from sales of the ShamWow or whatever other poorly-named product he sells in infomericals, so yeah, it's that easy if you have enough money.

I recall liking this when I saw it years ago. It may not be as great as everybody thought, but I sincerely doubt it's HDTGM-worthy. Now, some of the later Cameron Crowe movies... oof. (Not that it's related to anything, but one of my favorite things I've ever overheard in public was a guy looking at his phone and asking in all seriousness: "'We Bought a Zoo.' What's that one about?")

I actually do remember hearing about this movie. Isn't there some bomb that would freeze stuff if it goes off? And there's a train? Also, whoever names their child "Skeet" is just asking for trouble.

I'm just trying to imagine people watching, say, Derek Jarman's "Blue" in 3D. "Wow, the blue really comes out at you!" ETA: It's also fun to, when they say stuff about how 3D is going to become predominant, replace "3D" with "Smell-O-Vision."

I'm just saying, nobody else complained about any of the other makeup, as if the whole of it was "Let's make white actors into Asians!"

I saw it in 3D, and it was some of the best I've seen. (Note: I've seen maybe eight and a quarter* movies in 3D.) I will just say this, though: Ridley Scott made some hyperbolic comments during the run-up to "Prometheus'" release about how much he loved 3D, and might have said that he'd never shoot 2D again. (I'd link to the article, but Google isn't working for me right now.) Which really has me worried for his upcoming "The Counselor," seeing as how the terms "3D" and "Cormac McCarthy" make no damn sense together. * I started watching "How to Train Your Dragon" in 3D, but I'd already seen it and kind of decided that I didn't need to rewatch it so soon.

No! Nononono, nononono, nononono NO! I legitimately love this movie and don't think it would fit at all. And the people complaining about the makeup really missed the point. (I love how they complained about making white people into Asians, but not making an Asian like Doona Bae into a Hispanic or Halle Berry into a white woman.)

It's partly because there are just so many good ones from recently to cover, and yeah, people tend to be more familiar with the recent ones. It's similar for why they don't do more obscure stuff.

One of my friends from another, now-defunct forum discussed this on CHUD. My favorite part:

That's what you get when you base a movie off your 7-year old's made-up stories. (Seriously, this is the origin of the movie.)

Honestly, I would be a lot more interested in this movie if it wasn't directed by Harmony Korine. Having seen his first film, "Gummo," and having heard about his other work and interviews he's given, he comes across as the kind of art school snob who thinks that disgusting an audience is better than entertaining or involving them, and if he can bore them at the same time, all the better.